Re: forwarded message from Richard Stallman

[James Henstridge <james daa com au>]

On Thu, 23 Dec 1999, Robert Roeser wrote:

> I really don't understand the whole deal behind the GNU/Linux naming.
> I don't think Linus Torvalds named Linux GNU/Linux. Richard Stallman seems
Linus named the linux kernel linux (well originally he wanted to call it
freeix, but that is not really relevant).  No one is saying you shouldn't
refer to the kernel by that name.

What you and a lot of people refer to as linux is the operating system,
which is comprised of a large number of components.  This includes the
linux kernel and a lot of gnu tools you use every day.

> When someone writes a program using Microsoft Visual Studio does Microsoft
> require that the person call there new product Micrsoft/Foo. No, they let
> the person call it what ever they want.
No one is trying to stop you calling linux linux.  It is more a suggestion
that you think about calling gnu gnu.  If you write a program and call it
foo, you would probably want others to call it foo as well.

> But now the Free Software Foundation, Free as in FREEDOM, wants people
> to call a program that is particularly successful GNU/Linux. Let the
> author of the program call it what he wants. If he wants to acknowledge
All the software distributed as part of the gnu project is there by their
respective author's choice.  It just so happens that quite a lot of this
gnu stuff can be found in the collection of packages refered to as linux.

> the free software foundation then let him, feel flattered, but don't try
> to force people, or request, or play about there morals to call it
> what you want, thats not free thinking at all.
> 
> Robert Roeser
> --Let the flamming began and forgive my bad spelling--

James.